Dispute arises over potential loophole in mail balloting

Monday

PROVIDENCE, R.I. — Two-time gubernatorial candidate Ken Block alleges there is a "gigantic" loophole in Rhode Island's voter-ID law for people who vote by mail ballot.

The allegation is the latest in a series since Block was hired by a nonprofit — co-founded by President Trump's former chief strategist Steve Bannon — to use his computer skills to data-mine for potential electoral abuses, including straight-out voter fraud. He recently made a formal request for a U.S. Department of Justice investigation.

On Monday, he alleged a new issue: the potential for people voting by mail ballot to escape Rhode Island's voter ID requirements.

"The use of mail ballots in Rhode Island's elections has exploded, with the 2016 general election seeing a doubling of mail ballot usage compared to recent previous elections. The use of mail ballots was marketed as 'early voting' by some officials,'' he noted.

His argument: "In 2011, the Rhode Island General Assembly passed a voter-ID law (RI General Law 17-19-24.2). This law is simply written, and states as follows: "From and after January 1, 2014, any person claiming to be a registered and eligible voter who desires to vote at a primary election, special election or general election shall provide proof of identity."

"There is nothing in this law to create an exemption to voter ID requirements for mail ballots. There is nothing in this law that limits the ID requirements to ballots cast in person, only on election day."

The problem, as he sees it: "The Rhode Island Board of Elections created a rule to address Rhode Island's voter-ID law in 2012. This rule, whose intent is to implement Rhode Island's voter-ID law, was written to only make voter ID applicable to voters who cast ballots 'on Election Day.'"

The 2012 rule says: "Any person claiming to be a registered and eligible voter who desires to vote on Election Day shall provide proof of identity."

Block's conclusion: "This rule creates what appears to be an illegal loophole that allowed roughly 40,000 votes to be cast in 2016 by voters who have been improperly exempted from providing ID as required by RI's voter-ID law, effectively allowing anyone who votes by mail (including emergency ballots) to vote without providing legally required ID."

"This is a serious and large elections issue that requires immediate legislative attention. How can the Rhode Island Board of Elections justify creating rules that are in apparent violation of legislatively passed laws?"" Block said in a midday statement.

"This improper exemption may have also led to violations of federal voting law,'' he said, "specifically the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) which requires that voters who do not supply personally identifying information when they register to submit that information the first time that they vote."

There was no immediate response to his latest run of findings and allegations by Secretary of State Nellie Gorbea, who has accused Block of jumping to erroneous conclusions in the past.

The Rhode Island Board of Elections has not responded, as a group, to Block's latest allegations but board member Stephen Erickson said Monday that Block is "once again wrong. In fact, it appears to be another effort to limit people’s ability to vote."

Erickson, in an emailed response to a Journal inquiry, said: "The mail ballot law specifically provides that any person filling out such a ballot shall sign the outer envelope in the presence of a notary or two witnesses. It is the notary’s responsibility to verify the identity of the person, and the Board individually reviews each and every outer envelope to ensure that the voter signature matches the signature on the ballot application that was submitted to the local board."

"For those, unlike Mr. Block, who have taken the time to actually observe the process, it is well known that the board regularly rejects mail ballots where there is a substantial difference between the two signatures or if the witnesses do not provide enough information so that they can be identified and questioned, if necessary,"" Erickson said.

Erickson said Block appears to "not understand federal requirements relative to votes cast overseas by military personnel, their dependents, and others living abroad. In fact, to take Mr. Block literally would not only violate federal law, it would do so in a way that would deprive troops stationed overseas of their right to vote."

"If Mr. Block were correct, we would have had to toss 40,000 mail ballots cast in the same way they have been cast for the past 16 years, thus disenfranchising those voters," Erickson said.

— kgregg@providencejournal.com(401) 277-7078On Twitter: @kathyprojo

Never miss a story

Choose the plan that's right for you.
Digital access or digital and print delivery.